Background
Inflated responsibility is a cognitive distortion that is characteristic of
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and plays a crucial role in maintaining it
(Salkovskis et at., 2000). The origins of inflated responsibility are uncertain, although
Salkovskis, Shafran, Rachman, and Freeston (1999) proposed five hypotheses. Two of
these related to experiences of excessive or insufficient levels of adaptive
responsibility in childhood. With no existing measure of this `adaptive' responsibility,
an initial aim of the study was to develop a measure to assess the responsibilities
performed by young people. Then, the relationships between young people's adaptive
responsibility, and parents' and young people's inflated responsibility and OCD
symptomotology were investigated.
Method
The study used a cross sectional correlational design with a non-clinical population of
young people (11 - 16years), and one of their parents (N = 67 dyads). All participants
completed measures of inflated responsibility, OCD, and the adaptive responsibility
of the young person.
Results
Responses on the new measure of adaptive responsibility were normally distributed,
indicating that it adequately addressed the range of responsibilities across the 11-16
year age range. In contrast to the hypotheses, no significant relationships were found
between high or low levels of adaptive responsibility and inflated responsibility or
OCD symptoms in parents or young people. The exception was a significant
difference in child-rated adaptive responsibility between those who scored high and
low on the OCD-interference scale of the Leyton Obsessional Inventory-Child
Version (Berg et al., 1988). Although parents' OCD was not related to young people's
OCD or young people's inflated responsibility, parents' inflated responsibility was
associatedw ith young people's inflated responsibility.
Conclusions
The results partially support the cognitive model of inflated responsibility in OCD, in
both adults and young people. The relationship found between parents' and young
people's inflated responsibility warrants further investigation. Methodological
weaknesses must be acknowledged in interpreting the results and future research with
larger samples is required to further explore the origins of inflated responsibility
beliefs.